Endoscopy, Table of Contents Endoscopy 2017; 49(05): 512DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-101688 Letter to the editor © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New YorkReply to Kanesaka et al. Authors Author Affiliations Peter Rolny Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden Recommend Article Abstract Buy Article(opens in new window) Full Text References References 1 Rolny P. The need for surgery after endoscopic treatment of colorectal neoplasms is the most important outcome criterion. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 80-82 2 Terasaki M, Tanaka S, Oka S. et al. Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for laterally spreading tumors larger than 20 mm. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 27: 734-740 3 Kobayashi N, Yoshitake N, Hirahara Y. et al. Matched case-control study comparing endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal tumors. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 27: 728-733 4 Arezzo A, Passera R, Marchese N. et al. Systemic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions. United European Gastroenterol J 2016; 4: 18-29 5 Saito Y, Yamada M, So E. et al. Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: technical advantages compared to endoscopic mucosal resection and minimally invasive surgery. Dig Endosc 2014; 26 (Suppl. 01) 52-61 6 Probst A, Ebigbo A, Märkl B. Endoscopic submucosal dissection of early rectal neoplasia: experience from a European center. Endoscopy 2016;